If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

What a defensive coach can do for you

Hey guys,

I was curious to see how much of a difference a coach can make on the defensive end. I think a large debate going on these boards is player hustle v. coach. I maintain, and will say this up front, that both are important.

However, I do distinguish between team defense and individual efforts on defense. I don't think our teams problem is with the latter. I truly believe that our team wants to play defense. I think they hustle and show great energy.

I think that you can see this in certain games. Look at Miami and New Orleans. Miami is particularly telling in my opinion. Miami is a one on one offensive team. They don't move the ball much and in many situations count on one of their big three to create plays. When this happens, our guys only have to play their man. They don't have to worry about switches or rotations. Their hustle won them those games.

However, when they play a team like Cleveland that absolutely relies on passing the ball, cuts, curls and pick and rolls, the Knicks get confused. They show an utter lack of defensive IQ, lose their assignments, and don't know where to rotate.

Side note: they also have no zone defense.

"A coach's job is to make them understand assignments [and] holding them accountable." -- Hubie Brown.

I don't think D'Antoni does any of the above. They are a relatively new team, but even before the trade, they were still showing some of the boneheaded moves they make on defense.

I have amassed some stats, which I think shows how, either a new attitude on defense by D'Antoni, or a new defensive minded coach can help us greatly (whether an assistant or head coach). Please find them below.

They use the Points Allowed Per 100 possessions for each individual player, and I think the stats are eye-opening. Now, you will see some stats where Amar'e's career defensive rating in this category is better than some of the guards -- please remember he plays a different position and that his defensive rating in this category should be lower. It is much more helpful to compare him to other centers/forwards.

First and Foremost, we start with the Bulls.
As you will notice, each player's stats below on the defensive end become better (including players who were already considered to be better defensive players). Pay particular attention to Carlos Boozer's, Derrick Rose's and Ronnie Brewer's. You will notice that under Tommy their points allowed per 100 possessions dropped significantly this year.

The main purpose of this is to show how both good and poor defensive players stats can be bettered with set defensive schemes and coach emphasized defense.

Now, their offense still sucks, but their defense has made them a top three team in the East and potential Championship contenders.

Next, we look at our New New York Knicks
Our players are not as good on the defensive end. Hell Amar'e stats were
even worse than Boozer's. But, the point here is two fold: (1) To show D'Antoni's offense has made our players worse on the defensive end; (2) To show that our players are not that far off from others.

You will notice that since the "new" Knicks came over, (though the games played are not a large enough statistical sample and that they still need time to jive together), that the numbers decreased significantly. Both by three points.

But, if you look at Chauncey and Derrick Rose, Billups' defensive stats were actually better career wise. You should also compare his stats while in Denver to Derrick Rose's stats last year (with Thib): Billups was a better defender.

Additinonally, Melo's stats are very similar to Brewer and Bogans (who both have showed significant improvement this year under a defensive minded coach).

Amar'e for his position is below average, but if Boozer can go under 100, then I would imagine so can Amar'e.

Lastly, we are not the Bulls, but there is a team that runs a faster paced offense, who also has great defense, in the San Antonio Spurs.

I I believe we should very much strive to be like this team. You will notice that this year, despite their pace being quicker (2010-11: Pace: 92.5 (13th of 30) vs. 2009-10 [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]: 91.7 (20th of 30)) they are putting up better defensive and offensive numbers.

The point of this is to show that we don't need Tommy Bull's numbers to win. Quite simply if we just enact some great defensive strategies (that everyone is on board with and knows how go about), we can become one of the best teams in the NBA.

C Coaching does matter, however. We need to slow down our pace, and concentrate more on defense if we are ever truly going to become elite. Our players can learn. They have shown hustle and energy and there are glimpse there.

But as Hubie said -- the coach has to give them a strategy and hold them accountable.

that's what Ive been trying to say along (w/o the statical jargon) that if we hired a d mined assistant coach to go along with dantani explosive offensive then we are definitely championship bound but the concepts and strategies must be in placed and enforced

Their defensive improvement from last year (in those three players) is modest improvement, mainly because they have added superior surrounding players who are defensive +'s in their own rights (Blair, eg, who has come into his own), and having depth to keep their frontline players fresh.

Freshness = the ability to make the key defensive stop, and keep the intensity high.

Maybe when a defensive wizard or naturally strong defender doesn't need surrounding circumstances to improve his defense, but mediocre or sub-par ones do.

And right now we have stank ass depth, no C, and over rely on offensively brilliant players to turn on their defensive chops at the most difficult and least-likely of times.

Would Tibs improve our D? Pop?

Of course! They are also defensive wunderkinds as coaches. We won't be getting them, or anything close in caliber.

Now,

Give us a legit starting C...any sort of legit, rounded out bench that includes some defensive 1trick ponies...and the time for our current players to gel...

You don't think we will experience, even if MDA doesn't change **** in his approach or deviate from where you think he is at, a dramatic improvement in D?

Especially the ability to get key defensive stops, especially late in games?

Now combine that with what will essentially be the NBA's #1 or #2 offense....

I agree point differential per/100 is a great metric. And ours will be tremendous.

Defensive wizards MAKE OTHERS BETTER.

The celtics? Random that Garnett made the other stars get their **** together defensively, along with Perkins?

Or the (*now*) praised Pau Gasol....He just happens to go to a team with naturally gifted defenders and guys who crave defense...And he becomes a hardened 2way player?

Cmon....The Center position at any rate is the premium position, especially for defense -- a surprise Chicago has one of the most vocal, demanding and solid defensive centers?

Or the Spurs with Duncan?

Our offense is and will remain #1 or close to with MDA. We can agree on this.

Our defense WILL make great strides simply by making shrewd decisions on players. And defensive coaches. Even if MDA is as bad as you say, and doesn't change.

Their defensive improvement from last year (in those three players) is modest improvement, mainly because they have added superior surrounding players who are defensive +'s in their own rights (Blair, eg, who has come into his own), and having depth to keep their frontline players fresh.

Freshness = the ability to make the key defensive stop, and keep the intensity high.

Maybe when a defensive wizard or naturally strong defender doesn't need surrounding circumstances to improve his defense, but mediocre or sub-par ones do.

And right now we have stank ass depth, no C, and over rely on offensively brilliant players to turn on their defensive chops at the most difficult and least-likely of times.

Would Tibs improve our D? Pop?

Of course! They are also defensive wunderkinds as coaches. We won't be getting them, or anything close in caliber.

Now,

Give us a legit starting C...any sort of legit, rounded out bench that includes some defensive 1trick ponies...and the time for our current players to gel...

You don't think we will experience, even if MDA doesn't change **** in his approach or deviate from where you think he is at, a dramatic improvement in D?

Especially the ability to get key defensive stops, especially late in games?

Now combine that with what will essentially be the NBA's #1 or #2 offense....

I agree point differential per/100 is a great metric. And ours will be tremendous.

Defensive wizards MAKE OTHERS BETTER.

The celtics? Random that Garnett made the other stars get their **** together defensively, along with Perkins?

Or the (*now*) praised Pau Gasol....He just happens to go to a team with naturally gifted defenders and guys who crave defense...And he becomes a hardened 2way player?

Cmon....The Center position at any rate is the premium position, especially for defense -- a surprise Chicago has one of the most vocal, demanding and solid defensive centers?

Or the Spurs with Duncan?

Our offense is and will remain #1 or close to with MDA. We can agree on this.

Our defense WILL make great strides simply by making shrewd decisions on players. And defensive coaches. Even if MDA is as bad as you say, and doesn't change.

I'm not comparing us to the Spurs. I'm saying we should strive to be like the Spurs. Our prob is more than just a center. Duncan is older, not putting up the same stats. They play great D becausr of their coach. Experience helps, but as you can tell by the stats, D'Antoni's offense makes players defensive ratings get worse.

We need a coach (assistant or head) that emphasizes defensive focus and intensity. We will never be an elite team without it.

Has Dantoni not been focusing on defense lately? He said it himself that the team would focus on defense first and the offense would naturally follow.

We have a brand new team who's lineup has just been completely shuffled by trades yet again. Give it time before you throw up random stats of teams that are in no way the same situation as us.

iSaYughh brings up a good point on how great defensive players make everyone else better. We don't even have a start worthy center on the team. How can we expect to match the Spur's and Laker's interior defense without a real big? I hate to say it, but please grow a backbone and get some patience.

Part of the fun is watching your team grow. Don't panic at every single negative thing and demand immediate gratification.

Has Dantoni not been focusing on defense lately? He said it himself that the team would focus on defense first and the offense would naturally follow.

We have a brand new team who's lineup has just been completely shuffled by trades yet again. Give it time before you throw up random stats of teams that are in no way the same situation as us.

iSaYughh brings up a good point on how great defensive players make everyone else better. We don't even have a start worthy center on the team. How can we expect to match the Spur's and Laker's interior defense without a real big? I hate to say it, but please grow a backbone and get some patience.

Part of the fun is watching your team grow. Don't panic at every single negative thing and demand immediate gratification.

Joe the stats are there. Maybe D'antoni is changing his stripesm maybe he's not. A center won't matter w/o a real emphais on defense. The spurs have a simliar team to in style. To have a such an undying commitment to D'Antoni that you are wlling to ignore hard numbers is sad to me.

Let me remind you that the Bulls put up those numbers w/o Noah for much of the year.

after the post game dantoni did mention they are spending extra hours talking about defenses and that jared jefferies is the anchor even seen them run zone wow what a surprise very impressed maybe he is turning a new leaf and is understanding that in the eastern conference you need to play d to compete in the playoffs

if we play a game of more posessions, wouldnt the stats be inflated? this post proves nothing.

More possesions, less defense, more losses. That's what this post has shown. If you need further proof, I just read a telling stat that defense needs to be our top priority: when we hold teams to under 100 points, we are 16-2. You guys act like I am asking for better defense b/c I hat MDA. I am showing you stats... pure numbers of how a coach can help us win games and make our players better defenders.

I put in my post that D'Antoni is fine by me if he becomes this guy, and looks like he is trying; yet, you act like I am attacking him. The Bulls Re now second in the East with a poor offensive team.... defense is what wins rings. The Celts are number one and a great defensive team. Defense wins games.

Our players can play D. They did it lst night. Hawks played a lot of one on one ball, but our guys played hard. MDA doesn't need to be Tommy, but he does need to actually accept D into his philosophy, even if tthat means slowing down his offense a bit and giving the players actual defensive schemes. He says he is trying to do that and that is good. But look at the numbers above, and tell me tommy didn't make his players better defenders. That is the point of this post.

I think it's unreasonable to expect a team to be great on offense and great on defense. We'd blow most teams out if we were. I just think that with a little more defense, we'd be in the top echelon of the league. I think it has more to do with the fact that the Knicks are a very small team. Perhaps adding a big guy will help our defense.

if we play a game of more posessions, wouldnt the stats be inflated? this post proves nothing.

Misread what you said here. No, the stats would not be inflated because this is points allowed per 100 possessions. So we judge everyone's stats on an even keel.

I think it's unreasonable to expect a team to be great on offense and great on defense. We'd blow most teams out if we were. I just think that with a little more defense, we'd be in the top echelon of the league. I think it has more to do with the fact that the Knicks are a very small team. Perhaps adding a big guy will help our defense.

I agree that as we expend so much energy on the offensive end because of more possessions per game that we will be less effective on the defensive end...

However, a great offense and great defense can exist. Look at the Lakers, Celtics and Spurs. They do demolish teams, and they become conference champs, elite teams, and NBA Champions for a reason. Now they have less possessions per game, though, too.

It is the reason why I brought up the Spurs in my post. The stats show that they are a faster paced team (2 in league), but not so fast that they are exhausted to play defense (7 in league).

It is not unreasonable to expect a team to have great offense and great defense. That is how you win games.

Oh and yes, I do believe adding a defensive big would help our team. I still think you need set defensive schemes to deal with the varying offensive plays we will see, but a good C will help. It's not the final answer, but it will help.

But, remember, D'Antoni loves this line-up. He likes having Amar'e at center (or at least that was his preferred line-up in Phoenix...). Maybe he is changing his tune on this? I don't know. It sounds like he is trying to change his views, but I think this is because he has three guys now that hold more power on the team than him.

yo, a coach doent make you the best defensive team in the nba, the players do. You cant compare the knicks with the two best defensive teams in the league. You can only use them as a marker as to where we want to get. Your observation is valid, just not that big of a deal to me.

It is also not fair to say the bulls are not a good offensive team, just because they have very good defense. By that note, the spurs arent a good offensive team either? The have rose (mvp pg) boozer (double double) noah (double double), deng (very good wing man) that is a good offensive team. Every team that is good defensively has a good centre. Wait until we have a centre to judge our coach. We are playing checkers and our oponents are playing chess. same board, different pieces....so the chess player looks smarter than the checkers player.

yo, a coach doent make you the best defensive team in the nba, the players do. You cant compare the knicks with the two best defensive teams in the league. You can only use them as a marker as to where we want to get. Your observation is valid, just not that big of a deal to me.

It is also not fair to say the bulls are not a good offensive team, just because they have very good defense. By that note, the spurs arent a good offensive team either? The have rose (mvp pg) boozer (double double) noah (double double), deng (very good wing man) that is a good offensive team. Every team that is good defensively has a good centre. Wait until we have a centre to judge our coach. We are playing checkers and our oponents are playing chess. same board, different pieces....so the chess player looks smarter than the checkers player.

With the last comment are you trying to say D'Antoni doesn't know how to properly coach defense (checkers vs. chess). And the stats show that a coach makes players better on the defensive end. Look at Tom's players numbers when he became head coach (while not having Noah for a few months). You can disagree with me, but you can't disagree with the numbers. Each player's defensive numbers increased under Tom.

I point out the Spurs because I wanted to show you that you can play a faster pace offense and STILL play defense. Spurs are a great defensive team (top ten)...

Our team hustles on D, they just don't know exactly how to hustle. Blame falls squarely on the coach.